2008 Woodie Awards
Administration did not restrict MCISA advertising
By: Ted Hoef
Issue date: 3/22/07 Section: Letters to the Editor
- Page 1 of 2 next >
I am writing to address the article written by Nikole Brown that appeared in The Journal March 8. This article reported on the March 5 event entitled "Nigger Wetback Chink: The Race Show," which was sponsored by the Multicultural Center and International Student Affairs.
I was struck by the large number of inaccuracies in the article and the accompanying subhead. The article falsely implied that university administration had held up the advertising for the program and had caused the poor turnout.
After speaking with Curtis Conrod, I learned that he had been misquoted in the article. I also spoke with the reporter and two editors from The Journal and discovered that one of the editors, Lanz Christian Bañes, wrote the subhead and changed the lead paragraph for the article after it was submitted.
The result was that a reader of the story would get a completely false perception that the administration of Webster University was not in support of this program. Contrary to what appeared in the article, here is the truth about this program:
- Webster University administration was very supportive of this program, based on its strong educational message about racial stereotypes.
- Webster University administration did not refuse to allow advertising for the event.
- It is not true that Webster University administration told the event sponsors that the advertising was inappropriate.
- It is not true that advertising for programs must be approved by the administration.
- It was not difficult to get acceptance for the group from Webster.
I did anticipate that some members of the community might react negatively to the title if they were not familiar with the positive educational purpose of the program. I asked MCISA to inform the Public Affairs office and members of the administrative council, so that they would be aware in case we received any reactions to the title. My understanding was that everyone in the administration was strongly supportive of this program.
I was struck by the large number of inaccuracies in the article and the accompanying subhead. The article falsely implied that university administration had held up the advertising for the program and had caused the poor turnout.
After speaking with Curtis Conrod, I learned that he had been misquoted in the article. I also spoke with the reporter and two editors from The Journal and discovered that one of the editors, Lanz Christian Bañes, wrote the subhead and changed the lead paragraph for the article after it was submitted.
The result was that a reader of the story would get a completely false perception that the administration of Webster University was not in support of this program. Contrary to what appeared in the article, here is the truth about this program:
- Webster University administration was very supportive of this program, based on its strong educational message about racial stereotypes.
- Webster University administration did not refuse to allow advertising for the event.
- It is not true that Webster University administration told the event sponsors that the advertising was inappropriate.
- It is not true that advertising for programs must be approved by the administration.
- It was not difficult to get acceptance for the group from Webster.
I did anticipate that some members of the community might react negatively to the title if they were not familiar with the positive educational purpose of the program. I asked MCISA to inform the Public Affairs office and members of the administrative council, so that they would be aware in case we received any reactions to the title. My understanding was that everyone in the administration was strongly supportive of this program.
Be the first to comment on this story